RASHMINA HIRENKUMAR PATEL vs NIMESHBHAI HARISHBHAI SHAH Advocate - A P PARMAR — 100/2025

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397,. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 06th March 2026.

CR RA - CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION

CNR: GJSR190011102025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

100/2025

Filing Date

02-08-2025

Registration No

100/2025

Registration Date

02-08-2025

Court

ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, BARDOLI

Judge

1-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 Section 397,

Petitioner(s)

RASHMINA HIRENKUMAR PATEL

Adv. Y P SHAH

Respondent(s)

NIMESHBHAI HARISHBHAI SHAH Advocate - A P PARMAR

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Hearing History

Judge: 1-3rd ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

06-03-2026

Disposed

21-02-2026

ORDER

10-02-2026

ORDER

10-02-2026

ORDER

10-02-2026

ORDER

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The 3rd Additional Sessions Judge at Surat, Bardoli dismissed a Criminal Revision Application challenging a summoning order in a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court held that a partner in a firm cannot escape criminal liability merely by not signing the cheque or claiming to be a "sleeping partner"—both partners share joint and several liability for firm transactions, and the defenses raised are matters of evidence for trial, not grounds for quashing at the summoning stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The 3rd Additional Sessions Judge at Surat, Bardoli dismissed a Criminal Revision Application challenging a summoning order in a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court held that a partner in a firm cannot escape criminal liability merely by not signing the cheque or claiming to be a "sleeping partner"—both partners share joint and several liability for firm transactions, and the defenses raised are matters of evidence for trial, not grounds for quashing at the summoning stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, BARDOLI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case